Talk:Worcester, England

WUUS-tər

Would disagree with the simplistic 'WUUS-tər'. Suggest the key is to divide syllabically as 'worce' + 'ster'. An 'r' should be heard, albeit subtly. This condiment has nothing to do with PG Wodehouse.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Brett Alexander Hunter (talk • contribs)

Images

This article has too many images. In particular, over-use as the infobox as a repository for landmarks where if absolutely necessary, a gallery shoud be placed at the end of the article. Discuss Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:37, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

The current selection is no real improvement, the shot of the cathedral is a poor choice as most of the building is obscured and the image of Greyfriars house is horrible, badly over-processed. Finally the bottom image of the Commandery is far too large in comparison to the rest of the montage. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:13, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

I would have to say that I preferred what was there before. G-13114 (talk) 13:06, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

I tend to agree. I note that the editor who made the changes, and suggested it went to Talk, has made no contributionto the debate. I am tempted to just revert it. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 13:21, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

I agree the new set of images may not have been ideal, however they appeared clearer and more in keeping with the present day Worcester. The images set now seem dated, and wouldn’t make me want to visit Worcester as opposed to the way for instance York wiki page looks. Worcester is a lovely place but this does not seem to be making it look as such, and I’m sure many would agree. I am not saying I’m promoting tourism here. The images I set may not be to someone’s liking they can be changed to what people think is right. Thank you MatthewDavid41 (talk) 02:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi All, would anyone mind me changing the top images in the infobox to the image that’s on now, it’s clearly showing the cathedral which is a key focus of the city? Let me know what you think or revert it back etc this also removes the other church and spire

Preparation for GA

Major contributors to the article will be considering improvements and updates towards obtaining GA status and help from any other editiors particularly members of WP:WORCS are most welcome to help out. GA requirements are getting stricter and this work will be planed around WP:CITIES which as Jim Killock points out is a guidance, not a policy, but long articles do stand a better chance if they adhere fairly closely to the guidelines.

Probably the first item to address is the choice of imagery in the infobox.The main infobox image should strictly be a panorama. There are some cityscapes on Commons but ideally one should feature the Severn, but from 2,722 in the category the choice is limited. Here is a shortlist.

• View_from_Worcester_Bridge,_Worcester_-_geograph.org.uk_-_6439336
• Worcester_Bridge,_Worcester_-_geograph.org.uk_-_6496931
• Worcester_riverside_-_geograph.org.uk_-_4468644
• River_Severn,_Central_Worcester_-_geograph.org.uk_-_3185511_(cropped)

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:59, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Suggested version:

Proposal A

I haven't added captions as some prefer them under individual images and others at the bottom of the montage. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:11, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

The view from the bridge is certainly also my preferred choice for the panorama Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:18, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Is it worth trimming top and bottom so that it dosn't dominate the infobox quite so much? I can drop it into photoshop and adjust it. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Done it but I can always revert it. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:26, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Looks good. The other images need views that more typify the city. The park and the guildhall could be anywhere in the UK. I've tried looking for photos of the magnificent Tudor buildings in Friar St (what's left of them after the council's rampage) but I can't find any. I now live 5,882 miles away so I can't pop into town to take any. All ideas welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:57, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Found two: One in Friar St and one in New St. In History of Worcester. On commons they were not in an appropriate cat. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:05, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Added tudor buildings instead of Guildhall and an alternative park view. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:13, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

The Hive makes a good Ancient and Modern contrast. Perhaps put it next to the Friar St.view and the park on the bottom row? How typical is the Commandery of the city? Perhaps it should be in the body of the article and replaced with a picture (cropped) of the Glover's Needle (for example) which is already in the body text. Alternatively just use it for an additional bottom row as it is to balance off the other imagesFile:WorcestersSkyline.jpg and later use something else in the body if need be.

. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:26, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Try this version Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:46, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Alternative version

Proposal B

I am not sure abour having two images of the glovers needle in the montage Murgatroyd49 (talk) 11:35, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

@Murgatroyd49, I agree but unless someone can take a better picture from that vantage point on the bridge, there's nothing much we can do about the spire looking as if it's on the roof of the warehouse and we do need a panorama for the top image and not the cathedral (much as I love the building - I used to be a bellringer there in the 60s). Nevertheless, the needle is an important landmark and has its own article. Perhaps crop it so that it fills the frame? On another note, while the Comandery is of historical significance, does it typify Worcester to a new, curious reader? It has its own article Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:43, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

I would move the Commandery image to the section on the civil war instead. I am having a trawl through commons trying to find some suitable replacement. There is an awful lot of dross! Murgatroyd49 (talk) 06:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

@Murgatroyd49, I know, 2,722 in the category. I went thriogh it all. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:31, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Debating whether the day or night shot of Friar street is better, any thoughts?

Other GA prep

Other than the long overdue tidy up of the history section, could I suggest asking for a Peer review at some stage? we are all very familiar with the page itself so fresh eyes can very much help. Jim Killock (talk) 11:36, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

@JimKillock I've started to tidy up the first sub-section of the history (see edit hist.) from a workshop page I created in my user space for sharing ideas on that, but as you wrote most of the Worcs History article, you will probably know just to what extent the history in the parent article can be radically reduced. A peer review is of course a standard step in a first attempt at GA after the editors are finished but the article needs a lot of work before getting there. There are many paras that need sources. Do you have any of the source books for fact checking? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:17, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

@JimKillock, I've done a massive re-editing and pruning of the history section, assuming that you already have in your main history article everythiing I've weeded out. Please take a moment to check it out and leave any comments here. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:09, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

@Kudpung The content seems fine, altho it misses the corruption and slugged development of Worcester's local politics, perhaps the tension between the relatively forward looking town and very conservative county. I may not have added all that to the original tho. The main issue is that keeping to chronology invites people to add industrial history and other aspects to the main body over time. I would be inclined to have headings that refer to some key themes, such as Medieval church, Medieval trade, Industrial history. Jim Killock (talk) 07:40, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

@JimKillock, Hi Jim. I took a break from this to work on Malvern College to win back its lost GA. That was successful so I will have to come back to Worcester now. Don't hesitate to add (or remove) anything, a GA is always an effort shared. Personally I tend to keep politics out of English settlement articles, for one thing it avoids later interference that may tank a once earned GA, but if you want to add something, go ahead. Right now there is enough in the article for a GA, but it just needs some missing sources . Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:57, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

"By the 7th century, following centuries of warfare with the Vikings, Worcester had become a centre for the Anglo-Saxon army.[citation needed]" - surely this is incorrect? Mixes up completely different 200 year periods

Images

I have refreshed the multiple images in the infobox added to this wiki page. I'm open to discussion of these images are not suitable. Thanks MatthewDavid41 (talk) 16:39, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Why didn't you join the conversation rather than just changing images willy-nilly? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 07:55, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

@Murgatroyd49, MatthewDavid41 has agreed to reduce his unilateral tinkering with city infobox images. I'm sure he will be able to broaden his activity into more urgent exploits, such as perhaps fighting vandalism. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:05, 4 September 2025 (UTC)